Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

worrydream.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 156 posts

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#101

Post by mattiask »

prawn wrote: post #99
mattiask wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it wouldn't be a solid ball since it would have to be able to be squeezed so if dropped it atleast shouldn't roll away, and contrary to most smartphones it would actually be able to handle being dropped quite well. Rings/camera/gestures (minority report) in general are of course interesting but I think the downside of that approach is no tactile feedback

That's true. What tactile feedback could a hackysack-size ball really give though besides perceived firmness? If the finger rings were actually more like thimbles, could they impart some texture onto a finger tip? If you were brushing over a virtual surface, could they then give a sensation of texture? Raised on a page to denote a button, etc? I really liked the OP's article, but found it frustrating stopping short o…

Well, the ball could in theory feel how much pressure you excert on it and where, and provide haptic feedback. In a super advanced scenarion perhaps the ball could provide feedback by varying it's firmness. Guess it depends on how advanced technology is how good the thimble solution could be, but it strikes me easier to manipulate a ball, which you could do even when it's in a suit pocket than to do gestures in the air. Some gestures might be doable though. I have a hard time coming up with a "Cursor" scenario for that solution though and tactility makes it so much more easy to control. Maybe if you used your fingers against a hard surface but that would limit it's flexibility.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#102

Post by csomar »

Well, this is supposed to be a video about the future of interaction design and not the future in general. But I have two points that I want to say:

- The future technology should help the man kind be independent. It doesn't need to make you rich, but just do your own thing. I don't like that someone is driving my car or waiting me in the airport. I'll prefer that they play music or baseball.

- We don't need high tech gadget and assistance. Get out of your computer and go see the world. There are hundred of millions of people that are diabetic around the world. Go and solve that, billions and may be trillions of $$ are there.

Brief, we don't need touch screens everywhere in the future. We don't need valets, actually having them is worse for the man kind. There are huge scales problems like disease and famine and joblessness that need to be solved.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#103

Post by sravfeyn »

feral wrote: post #17

I just watched the video, and typed my reactions, as I had them; no idea if this will be of interest. * * * People still travel for meetings? By plane? Wait, someone is driving the car? Thats not very productive. There are bellhops? Why are there still bellhops in the future? What do they do? Why is the screen so small? Why have a screen, if you have those perfect augmented reality glasses? 'Creating reply interface'…

I had similar thoughts, but I guess the video's main emphasis is on User Interface which is highlighted most.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#104

Post by cageface »

prawn wrote: post #84
mrshoe wrote: post #51

I can't help but think that the success of the iPhone and iPad has caused a big step back in usability among devices that try to copy them. Two similar examples: Garmin's newer aircraft GPS units have touch screens instead of knobs and buttons. The iPad has proven very popular among pilots. I can see why Garmin would decide that "touch is the future." But, while I'm flying an airplane, for my money I'd rather have kn…

I appreciate your point and prefer physical controls when driving, but obviously one major advantage of the described approach is that the same space can be used to control different things - e.g., swap out the sat-nav area for air-con controls, put up weather or traffic reports if the music is switched off, etc.

That's the tradeoff of touch interfaces in a nutshell. They're jacks of all trades, masters of none. This is why musicians, for example, are still willing to shell out many thousands of dollars for a real synthesizer or drum machine even though a standard PC and generic midi keyboard can make all the same sounds. For some tasks, it's worth paying the heavy premium for a dedicated physical interface.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#105

Post by henrikschroder »

aphyr wrote: post #13

The article focuses on "everyday object" manipulation, but he's right about technology too: there are a wealth of common HCI tools that glass cannot accommodate. - The textual keyboard remains one of the fastest methods of text entry. It can be used without looking, offers high bandwidth, affords both serial and chorded inputs, and works well for precise navigation in discrete spaces, like text, spreadsheets, sets of…

> A well-made dial is almost always faster and more precise than up-down digital controls.

Eight years ago I bought a microwave oven for my apartment that had a digital knob. It's a physical knob hooked to the timer, but since it's digital, it accelerates. Below one minute, each "notch" increases the time with 5 seconds, but as you go higher, each notch adds more and more time to the total until it starts adding 5 minutes per notch.

It's a fantastic input method for setting a timer since it's tactile - you feel each notch where the time changes, it's deterministic - 30 seconds is always a quarter of a turn, 2 minutes is always a bit more than one turn, 7 minutes is always a bit more than two turns, etc, and it's superior to an analogue timer - it accelerates, you get more precision in the lower ranges and less precision in the higher ranges.

A few years ago I moved and had to buy a new microwave. Except I couldn't find one with a digital dial, all manufacturers had switched back to the shitty input method of +/- buttons again because.. I don't know. Fashion?

It makes me furious when people and companies make interfaces that are clearly inferior existing alternatives for no good reason at all. But most consumers don't care, and here we are. :-/

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#106

Post by shin_lao »

feral wrote: post #17

I just watched the video, and typed my reactions, as I had them; no idea if this will be of interest. * * * People still travel for meetings? By plane? Wait, someone is driving the car? Thats not very productive. There are bellhops? Why are there still bellhops in the future? What do they do? Why is the screen so small? Why have a screen, if you have those perfect augmented reality glasses? 'Creating reply interface'…

Also, in the future, color is obviously outlawed.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#107

Post by georgemcbay »

aphyr wrote: post #13

The article focuses on "everyday object" manipulation, but he's right about technology too: there are a wealth of common HCI tools that glass cannot accommodate. - The textual keyboard remains one of the fastest methods of text entry. It can be used without looking, offers high bandwidth, affords both serial and chorded inputs, and works well for precise navigation in discrete spaces, like text, spreadsheets, sets of…

Re: Dials.

I HATE, HATE, HATE the way more and more cars are doing away with the dial. Dials are awesome. Especially in cars.

I can operate the dial while driving and not risk killing someone. Replacing dial controls with flush push buttons, or worse consolidated touchscreens that control virtually everything means either I don't get any control of my radio/AC/etc when I am moving or I risk running someone down because I'm too preoccupied dealing with the shitty no-affordance monstrosity of a UI you replaced a perfectly great thing with.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#108

Post by Too »

georgemcbay wrote: post #107
aphyr wrote: post #13

The article focuses on "everyday object" manipulation, but he's right about technology too: there are a wealth of common HCI tools that glass cannot accommodate. - The textual keyboard remains one of the fastest methods of text entry. It can be used without looking, offers high bandwidth, affords both serial and chorded inputs, and works well for precise navigation in discrete spaces, like text, spreadsheets, sets of…

Re: Dials. I HATE, HATE, HATE the way more and more cars are doing away with the dial. Dials are awesome. Especially in cars. I can operate the dial while driving and not risk killing someone. Replacing dial controls with flush push buttons, or worse consolidated touchscreens that control virtually everything means either I don't get any control of my radio/AC/etc when I am moving or I risk running someone down becau…

Same on laptops, if i'm in a coffeshop and forgot to turn the volume down and suddenly some video starts playing at full volume, i want to be able to quickly turn down a physical dial to zero, that would take me under 0.1 seconds. Not press fn+F11 ten times which takes almost a second.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#109

Post by zbyszek »

mattiask wrote: post #62

Oki doki, so given plausible future technology let's try to brainstorm a solution that addresses the issue of tactility in interaction, I give you the ... drumroll KinBall (Kinectic ball). The Kinball would essentially be a wireless ball, like a small juggling sack (the smaller ones) that you could interact with to control devices. So the Kinball would have the following features * Gyroscope/acceleratometer so it kno…

I can't help being reminded of that ball in Woody Allen's "Sleeper". Fascinating speculation, none the less.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#110

Post by Zolomon »

henrikschroder wrote: post #105
aphyr wrote: post #13

The article focuses on "everyday object" manipulation, but he's right about technology too: there are a wealth of common HCI tools that glass cannot accommodate. - The textual keyboard remains one of the fastest methods of text entry. It can be used without looking, offers high bandwidth, affords both serial and chorded inputs, and works well for precise navigation in discrete spaces, like text, spreadsheets, sets of…

> A well-made dial is almost always faster and more precise than up-down digital controls. Eight years ago I bought a microwave oven for my apartment that had a digital knob. It's a physical knob hooked to the timer, but since it's digital, it accelerates. Below one minute, each "notch" increases the time with 5 seconds, but as you go higher, each notch adds more and more time to the total until it starts adding 5 mi…

Most consumers don't know they should care. :/
Post reply on HN